TITLE OF THE RESEARCH PAPER

The approach of Magna Carta towards poor

By

Name of the Student: Kranthi Kiran.T

Roll No.: 2018LLB127

Semester: IV

Name of the Program: 5 year (B.A., LL.B.)

Name of the Faculty Member

Dr. Bhagya Lakshmi.N

Subject

Law and poverty

Date of Submission:07-12-2020

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYAPRASTHA “, SABBAVARAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM–531035, ANDHRA PRADESH
 Acknowledgment

I heart fully express my special thanks to my subject teacher Dr. bhagya Lakshmi.N, Assistant professor of law for
giving me the opportunity to do the research on the topic “The approach of Magna Carta towards poor”. It
helped me to know many things and gain knowledge. I also thank her for guiding me throughout the research and
responding for my doubts regarding the research paper.

I would also like to thank my University ‘Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University’ for providing me with
all the required materials for the completion of my research paper and I also came to know many new things.
 Table of Contents

Chapter I

Synopsis…………………………………………………………………………………1-2

Evolution of Magna Carta………………………………………………………………3

Meaning of Magna Carta……………………………………………………………….4

Chapter II

Magna Carta in India…………………………………………………………………..4-6

 Why fundamental rights are called Magna Carta of India

 Why the Fundamental Rights are Fundamental?
 Features of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental rights related to poor in India: Magna Carta……………………….6-10

 Right to equality
 Right to life
 Right against exploitation
 Right to Education

Case Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….11-18

Rights under Magna Carta for poor-phillipines………………………………………..19

Chapter III

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….19-20

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………21
 Table of Cases

Case Title Citation

Olga Tellis & Ors vs Bombay Municipal

Corporation& Ors 1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

Balaji v. State of Mysore 1963 AIR 649, 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 439

People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Others

Vs.: Union of India & Others AIR 1982 SC 1473

Miss Mohini Jain vs State Of Karnataka And Ors 1992 AIR 1858, 1992 SCR (3) 658

Gaurav Jain vs Union Of India & Ors AIR 1997 SC 3021

1

Synopsis

Introduction:

Magna Carta (the Great Charter of Liberties) was issued by King John of England in June, 1215. There were
multiple annulments and reissues later on, but its importance lies in the fact that it laid the foundation of citizen
rights in the further evolution of English State.

In the case of India, there is no particular document in History to which citizen rights can be attached with. In fact
Modern Indian State is not the result of a historical evolution like it happened in Europe. In India, it was the
Constitution of India which recognised the rights of citizens (and non citizens) for the first time in such a
revolutionary way, analogies of which are nowhere to be found in World History.

Even the word Magna Carta falls short to describe what the Founding Father’s of this Nation did through Part III of
the Constitution of India: “The Fundamental Rights”.

Fundamental Rights to all irrespective of income, education, religion, caste or gender. The Magnum Opus of
Rights.

On April 12, 2019, President Duterte signed into law Republic Act 11291 known as the “Magna Carta of the Poor.”
The Magna Carta is in implementation of the declared policy of the State “to uplift the standard of living and
quality of life of the poor and provide them with sustained opportunities for growth and development.” It mandates
the State “to adopt an area-based, sectoral and focused intervention to poverty alleviation where every poor
Filipino must be empowered to meet the minimum basic need through the partnership of the Government and the
basic sectors”

Research questions:

 Whether magna carta for poor is being applicable efficiently?

 Whether fundamental rights in India play a significant role as magna carta for poor?

Objective of Study:

 The main objective is to know the purpose of magna carta and hows its being implemented to poor.
2

 And also to critically study the rights that are available to poor under magna carta.

Significance of study:

Magna Carta still forms an important symbol of liberty today, often cited by politicians and campaigners, and is
held in great respect by the British and American legal communities, Lord Denning describing it as "the greatest
constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary
authority of the despot.

Scope of the study:

The scope of this study is curtailed to the laws applicable in India and Phillipines.

Research Methodology:

The research methodology is doctrinal in nature. In addition to this, the research article is:

a. Analytical;
b. Comparative;
c. Descriptive;
d. Critical.

Literature Review:

Literature Review

 Civil Procedure and the Establishment Clause: Exploring the Ministerial Exception, Subject-Matter
Jurisdiction,Gregory.A, (2008-2009)-Hein online

The author in this article establishes the relation between jurisdiction and relief. And it explains step by step
instructions to get the rights restored or guaranteeing pay or damage sustained,like the individual needs to
move toward the suitable discussion, which has the power to adjudicate on the issue and award the relief so
looked for.

 Mulla, The Code of Civil Procedure, Binod Mohan Prasad (Ed.), 17th Edition, Lexis Nexis Butterworths,
New Delhi, 2007
3

This book deals with the extent of jurisdiction which will be discussed with reference to the subject-matter,and also
describes the types of jurisdiction.And examines the sections regarding relief with respective case laws.

 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments, Adrian Briggs,6th edn, 2015-Lexis advance

The author in this article has given a clarity to the question of; while jurisdiction of a court is determined, the
nature of the case, the pecuniary value of the suit, and the territorial limitation of the court need to be taken into
consideration.

Evolution of Magna Carta

1
Magna Carta Libertatum (Medieval Latin for "Great Charter of Freedoms"), commonly called Magna
Carta (also Magna Charta; "Great Charter"), is a charter of rights agreed to by King John of
England at Runnymede, near Windsor, on 15 June 1215. First drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury to make
peace between the unpopular King and a group of rebel barons, it promised the protection of church rights,
protection for the barons from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments
to the Crown, to be implemented through a council of 25 barons.

After John's death, the regency government of his young son, Henry III, reissued the document in 1216, stripped of
some of its more radical content, in an unsuccessful bid to build political support for their cause. At the end of the
war in 1217, it formed part of the peace treaty agreed at Lambeth, where the document acquired the name Magna
Carta, to distinguish it from the smaller Charter of the Forest which was issued at the same time. Short of funds,
Henry reissued the charter again in 1225 in exchange for a grant of new taxes.

2
At the end of the 16th century there was an upsurge in interest in Magna Carta. Lawyers and historians at the time
believed that there was an ancient English constitution, going back to the days of the Anglo-Saxons that protected
individual English freedoms. They argued that the Norman invasion of 1066 had overthrown these rights, and that
Magna Carta had been a popular attempt to restore them, making the charter an essential foundation for the
contemporary powers of Parliament and legal principles such as habeas corpus. Although this historical account
was badly flawed, jurists such as Sir Edward Coke used Magna Carta extensively in the early 17th century, arguing
against the divine right of kings propounded by the Stuart monarchs. Both James I and his son Charles I attempted
to suppress the discussion of Magna Carta, until the issue was curtailed by the English Civil War of the 1640s and

1
Magna Carta, Guthrie, William D.,American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 15, Issue 1 (January 1929), pp. 39,hein online

Magna Carta, Guthrie, William D.,American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 15, Issue 1 (January 1929), pp. 43,hein online
2
4

the execution of Charles. The political myth of Magna Carta and its protection of ancient personal liberties
persisted after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 until well into the 19th century. It influenced the early American
colonists in the Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the American Constitution in 1787, which became the
supreme law of the land in the new republic of the United States. Research by Victorian historians showed that the
original 1215 charter had concerned the medieval relationship between the monarch and the barons, rather than the
rights of ordinary people, but the charter remained a powerful, iconic document, even after almost all of its content
was repealed from the statute books in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Meaning of Magna Carta:

3
A list of rights and privileges that King John of England signed under pressure from English noblemen in 1215. It
established the principles that the king could not levy taxes without consent of his legislature, or parliament, and
that no free man in England could be deprived of liberty or property except through a trial or other legal process.

Magna Carta in India:

Why fundamental rights are called Magna Carta of India?

It covered in the Part III of the Indian Constitution (Under article 12 to article 35). It has largely been incorporated
from Bills of Rights of USA constitution and also called as Magna Carta of Indian Constitution because it is
Justiciable or Enforceable in a court of law. This is the elaborated fundamental rights description in entire world.

They do not do any discrimination among the citizens of India on the base of  colour, religion, sex etc. It holds the
equality of all individuals, the dignity of the individual, the larger public interest and unity of the nation. It
promotes ideal of political democracy and prevent the establishment of an authoritarian despotic rule in the
country, and protect the liberties and freedoms of the people against the invasion by the State.

Why the Fundamental Rights are Fundamental?

4
Because they cover the basic of fundamental needs of citizen and are guaranteed and protected by the
Constitution, which is the fundamental law of the land. It form the back bone, core and soul of constitution
(Fundamental Rights + Directive Principles of State Policy). They are most essential for the all-round development
(material, intellectual, moral and spiritual) of the individuals.

Originally, the Constitution provides for Seven Fundamental Rights:

 Right to Equality (Articles 14 to 18)
3
Magraw, Daniel, Magna Carta and sustainable development, GP Solo, Vol. 33, Issue 2 (March/April 2016), pp. 68,hein online
4
Magraw, Daniel, Magna Carta and sustainable development, GP Solo, Vol. 33, Issue 2 (March/April 2016), pp. 70,hein online
5

 Right to Freedom (Articles 19 to 22)

 Right against Exploitation (Articles 23 to 24)
 Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25 to 28)
 Cultural and Educational rights (Articles 29 to 30)
 Right to property (Article 31): It was deleted by the 44th  Amendment Act 1978. IT is made under legal
right under Article 300-A in Part XII of the Constitution.
 Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32): According to father of Indian Constitution Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar, Right to enforce Right since itself is fundamental, supreme court can not refuse you to entertain
the Right.

 So at present, there are only Six Fundamental Rights.

Features of Fundamental Rights

5
people in democratic countries enjoy certain rights, which are protected by judicial system of the country
concerned. Their violation, even by the State, is not allowed by the courts.Such rights are called “Fundamental
Rights”. No democracy can function in the absence of basic rights such as freedom of speech and expression.
Constitution of India enshrines ‘Fundamental Rights’.Various social, religious, economic and political problems in
our country make Fundamental Rights important. Fundamental Rights are enumerated in Part III from Article 14 to
32 of the Constitution. There are some rights which are available to the citizens of India only while some are
available to all persons-citizens and non-citizens. Fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 15, 16, 19, 29 and 30
are available to the citizens only.

Objectives of Fundamental Rights:

1.To ensure the fullest physical, mental and moral development of every citizen. They include those basic
freedoms and conditions which alone can make life worth living.

2..To generate a feeling of security amongst the minorities in the country.

3.To establish the framework of ‘democratic legitimacy’ for the rule of the majority.

4.To provide standards of conduct, citizenship, justice, and fair play.

5.To serve as a check on the government. In our Constitution

5
Stuart, William A, Constitutional Clauses of Magna Carta ,Virginia Law Review, Vol. 2, Issue 8 , pp. 565,jstor
6

Fundamental rights are justiciable:

6
Justiciable means that if these rights are violated by the government or anyone else, the individual has the right to
approach the Supreme Court or High Courts for the protection of his/her Fundamental Rights. A right without
remedy is a meaningless concept. Articles 32 and 226 read with Article 13 make fundamental rights enforceable.
Constitution of India does not permit the legislature and the executive to curb these rights either by law or by an
executive order. The Supreme Court or the High Courts can set aside any law that is found to be infringing or
abridging the Fundamental Rights. Under the Articles the 32 and 226 read with Article 13, the Supreme Court and
the High Court are empowered to issue appropriate order, direction and writs including writs in the nature of
habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo-warranto and certiorari for the enforcement of the fundamental rights
guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.

Fundamental rights related to poor in India: Magna Carta

 Right to equality
 Right to life
 Right against exploitation
 Right to Education
Right to equality:
7
Right to equality is right includes the equality before the Law which implies a prohibition of discrimination on the
basis of caste, creed, color or sex, equal protection of the law, equal opportunity in public employment and
abolition of untouchability and titles. It also states that every citizen shall have equal access to all public places.

To provide equal opportunities there will be no reservation in government services except in the case of scheduled
caste, scheduled tribes, and other backward classes and for war widows and physically handicapped person. This
right was made to abolish untouchability which was practiced in India for decades.

Special provision for women and Children... Article 15(3)

Article 15 (3) is one of the two exceptions to the general rule laid down in clauses (1) and (2) of Article 15. It says
that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special ' provision for women and children.

6
Magna Carta: from King John to western liberty,Nicholas Vincent, pp 27,lexis advance
7
Stuart, William A, Constitutional Clauses of Magna Carta ,Virginia Law Review, Vol. 2, Issue 8 , pp. 570,jstor
7

Women and children require special treatment on account of their very nature. Article 15 (3) empowers the State to
make special provisions for them. The reason is that “women’s physical structure and the performance of maternal
functions place her at a disadvantage in the struggle for subsistence and her physical well being becomes an object
of public interest and care in order to preserve the strength and vigor of the race. Thus, under Article 42, women
workers can be given special maternity relief and a law to this effect will not infringe Article 15 (1). Again, it
wont“not be violation of Article 15 if educational institutions are established by the State exclusively for women.
The reservation of seats for women in a college does not offend against Article 15 (1).

Special Provision for advancement of Backward Classes and advancement of SC’s and ST’s. Article 15(4)

Article 15(4) is another exception to clauses (l) and (2) of Article 15, which was added by the Constitution (lst
Amendment) Act, 1951, due to decision in

Article 15(5): special provisions related to their admissions to educational institutions including private
educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the state.

Article 15(5)--By the Constitution (93rd Amendment) Act, 2005, the Parliament inserted clause (5) in Article 15
with effect from 20-1-2006 to nullify the effect of these judgments :

"Nothing in this Article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of Article 19 shall prevent the State from making any
special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for
the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to
educational institutions including private educational institutions. whether aided or unaided by the State, other than
the minority educational institutions referred to in clause ( l) of Article 30."
This Amendment enables the State to make provision for reservation for the above categories of classes in
admission to private educational institutions. The Amendment. However keeps the minority educational
institutions out of its purview. Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the ground of religion.

Abolition of untouchability: Article 17 of the constitution abolishes the practice of untouchability. The practice of
untouchability is an offence and anyone doing so is punishable by law. The Untouchability Offences Act of 1955
(renamed to Protection of Civil Rights Act in 1976) provided penalties for preventing a person from entering a
place of worship or from taking water from a tank or well.

The objective behind this is to acquire right to equality.

8

Right to Life: Article 21 secures two rights

1)  Right to life, and

2) Right to personal liberty.

8
The Article prohibits the deprivation of the above rights except according to a procedure established by law.
Article 21 corresponds to the  Magna Carta of 1215, the Fifth Amendment to the American Constitution, Article
40(4) of the Constitution of Eire 1937, and Article XXXI of the Constitution of Japan, 1946.

Meaning and concept of Right to life

'Life' as mentioned under Article 21 signifies not merely living or the physical act of breathing. It has a much more
profound meaning that signifies the:

 Right to live with human dignity;

 Right to livelihood;

 Right to health;

 Right to pollution free air; and

 Right to live a quality life.

 Right to go abroad;

 Right to privacy;

 Right against solitary confinement;

 Right against delayed execution;

 Right to shelter;

 Right against custodial death;

 Right against public hanging; and anything and everything that fulfills the criteria for a dignified life.
8
Stuart, William A, Constitutional Clauses of Magna Carta ,Virginia Law Review, Vol. 2, Issue 8 , pp. 580,jstor.
9

9
Article 21 in a sense is limitless in its scope as it embodies everything that a human being requires to live a quality
life so that he/she can afford the opportunities to make his/life better, more fruitful and secure.

In a landmark judgment on the right to life, the Honorable Supreme Court inter alia held that, "life as here used is
something more is meant more than mere animal existence…"

Therefore, the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, that is to say
the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing, shelter and facilities of self expression such as
reading writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and mingling with
society. To have all of this is to live with dignity and we can call ourselves fortunate to be governed by laws that
guarantee this basic law of life and liberty.

In this way we see that the right to life as guaranteed by Article 21 covers in totality the entire bouquet of rights
and obligations that guarantee a life of freedom and dignity.

We have already analyzed the first part of the Article that encapsulates that every individual is fundamentally
entitled to his life and personal liberty, unless deprived by the due process of law.

To recap, Article 21 mentions that, "No person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to
procedure established by law."

10
The expression "procedure established by law" has been subject to examination in various landmark cases and the
consensus is that that the procedure prescribed by law for depriving a person of his life and personal liberty must
be "right, just and fair" and not "arbitrary, fanciful and oppressive," otherwise it would directly violate Article 21.

Some of the Directive Principles are listed herein below for easy reference:

 right to pollution free air and water;

 protection of under trial;

 right of every child to full development; and

 protection of cultural heritage.

Right against exploitation:

9
Polychronicon: Interpreting Magna Carta, Teaching History No. 159, UNDERNEATH THE ESSAY (June 2015), pp. 46,lexis advance

10
Magna carta for a global community,M.V. Naidu, Peace Research,Vol. 35, No. 2 (November 2003), pp. 1,jstor
10

Practices prohibited  by Article 23

11
Article 23 explicitly prohibits the following discussed practices:

 Begar: This is a form of forced labour which means involuntary work without any remuneration. In other
words, it can be said that a person is compelled to work against his will without being paid for it.  

 Bonded Labour/ Debt Bondage: Article 23 prohibits bonded labour as it is a form of forced labour as per
this article. This is a practice under which a person is forced to work to pay off his debt. The money they
get is very little and the work they do gets doubled. Often these debts get passed over to the next
generations. Hence, it is known as  a form of forced labour.

 Human trafficking: It means selling and buying of a human being like goods and includes immoral
trafficking of women and children. Although, slavery is not expressly mentioned under Article 23 but it is
included within the meaning of ‘traffic in human beings’.  In pursuance of Article 23, Parliament has
passed the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, for punishing human trafficking.

Right to Education:
12
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE), is an Act of the
Parliament of India enacted on 4 August 2009, which describes the modalities of the importance of free and
compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 in India under Article 21a of the Indian Constitution. India
became one of 135 countries to make education a fundamental right of every child when the Act came into force on
1 April 2010. Now every child of the age of 6 to 14 years has right to have free education in neighbourhood school
till elementary education

11
Magna carta for a global community,M.V. Naidu, Peace Research,Vol. 35, No. 2 (November 2003), pp. 12,jstor

12
Magna carta for a global community,M.V. Naidu, Peace Research,Vol. 35, No. 2 (November 2003), pp. 5,jstor

12.1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

11

Case Analysis

13
Olga Tellis & Ors vs Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors

Citation: 1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51

Facts of the case

1. In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, the state of Maharashtra in 1981 and the Bombay
Municipal Corporation decided to evict the pavement dwellers and those who were residing in slums in
Bombay.

2. Pursuant to that, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra Mr A. R. Antulay ordered on July 13 to evict slum
dwellers and pavement dwellers out of Bombay and to deport them to their place of origin.

3. The eviction was to proceed under Section 314 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act 1888.

4. On hearing about the Chief Minister’s announcement they filed a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay
for an order of injunction restraining the officers of the State Government and the Bombay Municipal
Corporations from implementing the directive of the Chief Minister.

5. The High Court of Bombay granted an ad interim injunction to be in force until July 21, 1981. Respondents
agreed that the huts will not be demolished until October 15, 1981. Contrary to agreement, on July 23,
1981, petitioners were huddled into State Transport buses for being deported out of Bombay.

6. The respondent’s action was challenged by the petitioner on the grounds that it is violative of Articles 19
and 21 of the Constitution. They also asked for a declaration that Section 312, 313 and 314 of the Bombay
Municipal Corporation Act 1888 is violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

Issues

The issues which were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme court, in this case, were as follows:

 Scope of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution?

 Constitutionality of provisions of Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.

arguments:

13
1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51
12

 Defence counsel stated that the pavement residents had admitted to the High Court that they did not claim
any basic right to install cabins on sidewalks or public roads and that they would not prevent their
demolition after the scheduled date.

 The council on the applicant’s behalf argued that the “right to life” guaranteed by Article 21 included the
right to a means of subsistence and that he would be deprived of his livelihood if he were expelled from his
slums. and its sidewalks, which would amount to a deprivation of his rights. life and therefore
unconstitutional.
 Petitioner argued that the procedure prescribed by Section 314 of the 1888 Act to eliminate encroachment
on the sidewalk is arbitrary and unreasonable, since not only does it not provide for notification prior to the
elimination of encroachment, but it also provides that The municipal commissioner can ensure that the
encroachment is removed “without notice”.

Reasoning

The right to life conferred by section 21 is vast and far-reaching. It does not simply mean that life can be
extinguished or removed only in accordance with the procedure established by law. This is just one aspect of the
right to life. The right to livelihood is an equally important aspect of this right because no one can live without
means of subsistence.

Judgment:

Although the Court refused to conclude that the expelled inhabitants were entitled to an alternative site, it ordered
that:

1. No one has the right to encroach on trails, sidewalks or any other place reserved for public purposes.

2. The provision of section 314 of the Bombay Municipality Act is not unreasonable in the circumstances of
this case.

3. Sites must be provided to censored residents in 1976.

4. Slums existing for 20 years or more should not be removed unless the land is required for public purposes
and, in this case, alternate sites must be provided.

5. High priority should be given to resettlement

13

14
Balaji v. State of Mysore

Citation: 1963 AIR 649, 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 439

Facts: The Mysore Government issued an order under Article 15 (4) reserving seats in the Medical and
Engineering Colleges in the State as follows : Backward classes 28%. more Backward classes 20%, Scheduled
Castes and Tribes 18%. Thus 68% of the seats available in the Colleges were reserved and only 32% seats were
made available to the merit pool. Some of the candidates had secured more marks than those admitted under the
reservation order but they failed to get admission only be reason of the Government order.

Issues

 Whether the order can create two categories as backward and more backward classes on the basis of caste?

 Whether the reservation of 68% of seats in accordance with provisions given under Article 15(4)?

Arguments

Since 1958 the State of Mysore has been endeavouring to make a special provision for the advancement of the
socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the State of Mysore under Article 15 (4) of the
Constitution, and every time when an order is passed in that behalf, its validity has been challenged by writ
proceedings.In brief, is the petitioners' grievance and they urge that the impugned order which has denied them the
facility of admission in the respective colleges is void under Arts. 15 (1) and 29 (2) and should not be enforced
against them. Accordingly, the petitioners pray that a writ of mandamus and/or any suitable writ or direction
should be issued against respondent No. 1, the State of Mysore (hereinafter called the State), and the two Selection
Committees which have been impleaded as respondents 2 & 3.

Reasoning

The sub-classification made by the order between ‘backward classes’ and ‘more backward classes’ was not
justified under Article 15(4). “Backwardness” as envisaged by Article 15(4) must be both social and educational
and not either social or educational. Though caste may be a relevant factor, it cannot be the sole test for
ascertaining whether a particular class is a backward class or not. Poverty, occupation, place of habitation may all

14
1963 AIR 649, 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 439
14

be relevant factors to be taken into consideration. Article 15(4) does not speak of ‘castes’ but only speaks ‘classes’
and ‘caste’ and ‘class’ are not Synonymous.

Judgment

Reservation of 68% per cent of seats in technical institutions, such as Engineering and Medical Colleges to the
exclusion of all other candidates if a single candidate from the Scheduled Tribes was available, would amount to
fraud upon the Constitution. Clause (4) of Article 15 only enables the State to make special and not exclusive
provision for the backward classes. The State would not be justified ignoring altogether advancement of the rest of
the society in its zeal to promote the welfare of backward classes. National interest would suffer if qualified and
competent students were excluded from admission in institutions of higher education. Speaking generally, the
special provision should be less than 50% how much less than 50% would depend upon the relevant prevailing
circumstances in each case.

15
People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Others Vs. Union of India & Others
Citation: AIR 1982 SC 1473

Facts
In this case there was a complaint of a violation of Article 24 of the constitution (which prohibits employing
children below the age of 14 years in hazardous employment) on behalf of child labourers employed in
construction work in Delhi. Also, the labourers who worked on the ASIAD-82 sites both on stadia and the
infrastructure like flyovers and hotels, were recruited by agents of construction contractors from backward villages
of Orissa, Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan. Working at a feverish pace, often
far beyond the working hours fixed by laws without the minimum daily wages due to them living in hovels, their
children dying of malnutrition and they themselves frequently becoming victims of accidents, these workers were
forced to complete the ASIAD projects in time by November 19. The terrible working and living conditions to
which these workers were subjected to were first brought to public notice by a fact-finding team of the People’s
Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) which visited some of the major sites in July and August 1981 and
interviewed the workers as well as their employers.
Issues:
1) Whether the writ petition can be maintainable against the private individual under Article-32 of the Indian
Constitution?

15
AIR 1982 SC 1473
15

2) Whether Article-21 of the Indian Constitution also include right to live with human dignity and right to
livelihood?
Argument

It was contended that the payment made to women workers was also contrary to the provisions of Equal
Remuneration Act, 1976, as they were paid only Rs.71-per day and the balance was being misappropriated by the
Jamadars.
(iii) There was also violation of Article 24 of the Indian Constitution as well as violation of Employment of
Children Acts, 1938 and 1970 as the contractors were engaged in employing children below the age of 14 years in
the construction work of the various projects.

Objections rose on behalf of the respondents against the maintainability of the writ petition:
(i) The respondent claimed that the petitioners had no locus standi to maintain the writ petition because there was
no violation of rights of the petitioners; the question involved is the rights of the workers employed in various
construction projects. Thus petitioners therefore could not have any cause of action.
(ii) Also, it was claimed that the workmen whose rights were said to have been violated were employees of the
contractors and not of the respondents. Also, the cause of action of the workmen, if any, was therefore against the
contractors and not against the respondents therefore no writ petition could lay against them.

Reasoning:

A wider meaning has also been given to the provisions of Article 21, 17, 23 of the Constitution so as to cover the
cases of Non-payment or less payment of wages to the workers which they are entitled under the provisions of law.
The Supreme Court considered the scope and ambit of Article 23 in detail.The Supreme Court used expressions
“bonded labour” and “forced labour” in Article 21 to “right to live with human dignity”. The rights and benefits
guaranteed to the labourers under various labour laws were made parts of basic Human Dignity and raised to the
status of Fundamental Rights.

Judgment

The court by its decision upheld the right of a poor worker to directly approach the Supreme Court under Article
32of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of rights created under various labour laws and particularly
under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, Interstate Migrant Workmen
(Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1977, Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, Employment of
Children Act, 1970 and Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The Supreme Court extended the scope of the meaning of
article 21 of the Constitution (right to life) to include the right to livelihood along with the ‘right to live with basic
human dignity’.
16

16
Miss Mohini Jain vs State Of Karnataka And Ors

Citation: 1992 AIR 1858, 1992 SCR (3) 658

Facts

Miss Mohini Jain, a resident in Uttar Pradesh, applied to enrol in a course at Sri Siddhartha Medical College, a
private medical college in Karnataka. The college requested a deposit of Rs. 60,000 for tuition fees for the first
year and a bank guarantee to cover the fees for the remaining years. Jain and her family did not have the means to
pay the requested sum, and the private medical college denied her admission to the course. Jain filed a petition with
the Supreme Court of India against the Karnataka government, challenging the notification permitting the private
medical college to charge a higher tuition fee to students not admitted to government seats than those admitted to
government seats. The Karnataka Medical Colleges Association and the Sri Siddhartha Medical College were also
added as respondents.

Issues

The case presented three main questions before the Supreme Court:

1. Whether a right to education is guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

2. If so, whether allowing private schools to charge capitation fees violates this right

3. Whether charging capitation fee in educational institutions violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which
guarantees equal protection of the laws.

Arguments

In this case the respondent contended at first that the criteria which have been followed in the private college
regarding the capitation fees is not chargeable from those students who were qualified for the Government seats
but only from those students who were from different classes.

The petitioner filed the petition in the Supreme Court of India with a contention that imposition of such higher fees
in the context of education by the private college is against the various articles under Indian Constitution.

Reasoning

 Under Article 21 and the dignity of an individual cannot be assured unless it is accompanied by a right to
education. In addition, the Court found that it is clear that the framers of the Constitution made it obligatory for the

16
1992 AIR 1858, 1992 SCR (3) 658
17

State to provide education for its citizens.  The Court cited the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and a
number of cases that held that the right to life encompasses more than “life and limb” including necessities of life,
nutrition, shelter, and literacy.

Judgment

The court held that by charging high capitation fees which can only be accessed by the richer sections of society
which ultimately can limit the right to education as well. On the other hand poor persons with better marks cannot
get admission due to inability to pay such a higher amount. In the conclusion of this, the educational institutions’
right to education gets denied.

17
Gaurav Jain vs Union Of India & Ors

Citation: AIR 1997 SC 3021

Facts:

The petitioner, an Advocate, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the Supreme Court (SC) of India, based
on an article "A Red Light Trap: Society gives no chance to prostitutes' offspring" published in the magazine 'India
Today' dated July 11, 1988. The petitioner prayed for establishing separate educational institutions for the children
of the fallen women (term used by the SC throughout the judgment). The SC stated in its order dated 15-11-1989
that “segregating children of prostitutes by locating separate schools and providing separate hostels would not be in
the interest of the children and the society at large”. While the SC did not accept the plea for separate hostels for
children of prostitutes, it felt that "accommodation in hostels and other reformatory homes should be adequately
available to help segregation of these children from their mothers living in prostitute homes as soon as they are
identified".

Issues:

 What are the rights of the children of fallen women, the modules to segregate them from their mothers and
others so as to give them protection, care and rehabilitation in the mainstream of the national life?
 What should be the scheme to be evolved to eradicate prostitution, i.e., the source itself; and what succour
and sustenance can be provided to the fallen victims of flesh trade?

Arguments

The petitioner contended for making provision of separate schools with vocational training facilities and separate
hostels for children of prostitutes.
17
AIR 1997 SC 3021
18

They contended that they are not inclined to accept the submission. Segregating children of prostitute by locating
separate schools and providing separate hostels, in our opinion, would not be in the interest of such children.

Reasoning

The SC stated that three Cs, viz., Counselling, Cajoling and Coercion were necessary to effectively enforce the
provisions of various statutes. The role of NGOs in rehabilitating and educating the children of the fallen women
was emphasized. Detailed directions were given for rescue, rehabilitation of prostitutes and children of prostitutes.
The SC held that society was responsible for a woman becoming a victim of circumstances therefore, society
should make reparation to prevent trafficking in women, rescue them from red light areas and other areas in which
the women were driven or trapped in prostitution. Their rehabilitation by socio-economic empowerment and
justice, is the constitutional duty of the State.

Judgment

In its judgment, the SC quoted the Fundamental Rights of women and children from the Constitution of India
(namely, Articles 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 38, 39, 45, 46) and relevant international instruments. The Supreme Court
held that the children of the prostitutes have the right to equality of opportunity, dignity, care, protection and
rehabilitation so as to be part of the mainstream of social life without any pre-stigma attached on them. The Court
directed for the constitution of a committee to formulate a scheme for the rehabilitation of such children and child
prostitutes and for its implementation and submission of periodical report of its Registry.

Rights under Magna Carta of poor-phillipines

18
Under Section 4 thereof, full enjoyment or realization of the following rights of the poor are requirements toward
poverty alleviation:

a)  Right to Adequate Food is the right of individuals or families to have physical and economic access to adequate
and healthy food, or the means to procure it. (Implementing Agency: Department of Social Welfare and
Development [DSWD], Department of Agriculture);

18
Magna Carta: from King John to western liberty,Nicholas Vincent,pp. 25
19

b)  Right to Decent Work is the right to the opportunity to obtain decent and productive employment, in conditions
of freedom, equity, gender equality, security and human dignity. (Implementing Agency: Department of Labor and
Employment [DOLE]);

c) Right to Relevant and Quality Education is the right to attain the full development of the human person.
(Implementing Agency: Department of Education [DepEd], Commission on Higher Education [CHED], Technical
Education and Skills Development Authority [Tesda]);

d) Right to Adequate Housing is the right to have a decent affordable, safe and culturally appropriate place to live
in, with dignity, security of tenure in accordance with RA 7279, otherwise known as the “Urban Development and
Housing Act of 1992,” in peace, with access to basic services, facilities, and livelihood. (Implementing Agency:
Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council [HUDCC]);

e) Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health is the right to have equitable access to a variety of facilities,
goods, services and conditions necessary for the realization of the highest attainable standard of health.
(Implementing Agency: Department of Health [DOH])

Conclusion:
It covered in the Part III of the Indian Constitution (Under article 12 to article 35). It has largely been incorporated
from Bills of Rights of USA constitution and also called as Magna Carta of Indian Constitution because it is
Justiciable or Enforceable in a court of law. This is the elaborated fundamental rights description in entire world.

They do not do any discrimination among the citizens of India on the base of  colour, religion, sex etc. It holds the
equality of all individuals, the dignity of the individual, the larger public interest and unity of the nation. It
promotes ideal of political democracy and prevent the establishment of an authoritarian despotic rule in the
country, and protect the liberties and freedoms of the people against the invasion by the State.

It also aim at establishing 'a government of laws and not of men'. Rule of law has three components i.e.
Supremacy, Classes to same law and Impartial and powerful judiciary.
20

Bibliography

 Magna Carta, Guthrie, William D.,American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 15, Issue 1 (January 1929)-
Hein online

 Magraw, Daniel, Magna Carta and sustainable development, GP Solo, Vol. 33, Issue 2 (March/April
2016)-hein online

 Stuart, William A, Constitutional Clauses of Magna Carta ,Virginia Law Review, Vol. 2, Issue 8-jstor
21

 Polychronicon: Interpreting Magna Carta, Teaching History No. 159, UNDERNEATH THE ESSAY
(June 2015)-Lexis advance

 Magna carta for a global community,M.V. Naidu, Peace Research,Vol. 35, No. 2 (November 2003)-
Jstor

 Magna Carta: from King John to western liberty,Nicholas Vincent-Lexis advance